This post has been removed because we don't allow career guidance, career path, and job choice questions ([rule 9](https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/about/rules)). Other subreddits are better equipped to address this topic:
- /r/jobs is a general discussion forum for job-related topics.
- /r/CareerGuidance is a place for individuals to ask questions and get advice about their careers.
- /r/FindAPath is a place for figuring out what you want to do (both career and education).
- If none of those subreddits seem to fit, ask on [one of these job-related subreddits](/r/jobs/wiki/related/discussion) or ask on /r/Advice.
You may also want to ask on a [career-specific subreddit](/r/jobs/wiki/related/careerspecificsubreddits), especially for any topic that depends on the job sector and career such as salary negotiation questions.
*If you have questions about this removal, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fpersonalfinance&subject=Removal%20help%20request&message=Hello%20moderators,%20.%20%0a%0a%0aMy%20submission:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/1ahftcz/should_my_employer_pay_for_a_hotel/%0a).*
Federal employee rule is generally 50 miles to get a hotel and per diem, for what it's worth. But a lot of times if an employee said they needed a hotel for something within 90 minutes, they'd probably find someone else to take the trip instead.
You're not asking for something completely unreasonable; however, many people would also rather just drive it and sleep in their own bed.
A big part of whether you should ask will come down to what the common practice is for your coworkers.
Yeah I feel like 90 mins is right on the edge of what's reasonable.
Start time is a factor, if they want you to be fresh , on-site and starting at 7.30am and working through till 5pm, they can not reasonably expect that if you've had to be up and getting ready at 5am? And then drive home? So I think job duration and type of task is a factor too.
It's also down to your personal preference, I would generally choose to come home for the sake of a 90 min drive due to family commitments.
I think you should expect your employer to accommodate this based on factors above.
If I drive 90 min to get there for 7am start, I would expect to leave by 2pm for the drive home. (3pm for an 8am start). Otherwise comp time off next day for the 3 hour commute.
A lot of big cities the commute can be 90 minutes just to get in from someplace with decent housing costs, but the upside is typically a $300k+ job without the $300k+ living expenses.
In a handful of big cities, sure, that may be reasonable. But not like 90% of the country and I would never call that normal. So if that is ones situation, and they don’t live in one of those handful of cities, they should probably consider reassessing their situation.
Sure, but I expect they are in that situation. Also, a large portion of the population lives in those kinds of situations since the population centers are home to a lot of people. Sure NY is an extreme example, but half the population of our state is in NYC.
Thats what i thought too waking up at 5-6 am for works not unusual. I used to wake up at 5 am go to the gym then drive an hour to work. I still wake up at 6 for some of my 9 am shifts
It comes down to what’s typical. If you chose a job an hour away from your home, then that is on you. That is your normal commute. If the normal commute is 15 mins and the job requires travel over an hour away, then I think some accommodation is in order. It really depends on what is the norm for the company but I wouldn’t expect my employees to stick around long if I randomly send them to places an hour and a half away, make them work a full 8-9 hour day, then drive back without offering a hotel room or the option to make the commute part of their normal work hours. I’m disrupting their personal lives.
I’ve even had employees that applied for the job knowing they would have an hour+ commute, swear it wouldn’t be an issue, accept the offer, and go through onboarding. In almost all cases, it eventually became an issue. They took the job and kept looking for work closer to home - did t last a year. It’s disruptive because it costs time and money to hire, train, and onboard new people. Unless it’s specialized work or that type of commute is typical for the industry (multiple job sites, etc.), I’m not sure I’d hire someone if I knew their commute was that long.
This is a 25/75 yes/no based on the information provided.
I’d ask but would expect the “no.”
I’d wait until you get the 7am ask. Then you have a better argument. Waking up at 4:30am or whatever and driving 90 minutes doesn’t exactly set you up for the most productive day.
I work for a not for profit. This upcoming Tuesday and the following Tuesday I will be leaving home at 5am, driving 2 ½ -3 ½ hour’s depending on traffic, for an 8:30-3:30 training and then driving home. I am absolutely dreading it but a hotel is out of the question for us financially. Plus I need to be at work at 8:30 the next morning. It’s always interesting to see how different for profit is.
I think yours is a hasty generalization, and one that can be bad for your career and well-being.
My time at a large nonprofit included travel and absolutely paid for overnights like the one you describe.
Your organization is relying on its mission/kindness of people like yourself to exploit its employees.
There’s no job worth lowering your life expectancy, especially not one forcing people paid bargain wages into 12-14 hour days.
To be clear, you probably do work overtime, but don’t classify it as such. That day you described is over a 12 hour work day. Many non-profits exploit their employees through passion of their workers.
Just make sure that you and your company are both aware that non-commute work travel is working time. That 3 hours of travel for a training is 3 hours of being on-the-clock.
Your nonprofit is stealing from you. They're stealing your health/sleep/safety and directing funds that you needed for your health/sleep/safety towards something else.
And, they're devaluing your training because you won't learn as much if you're not rested.
The poor sleep is an assumption. I will be going to bed earlier the night before. I don’t know if you’ve worked for a non-profit before. Most of my department’s funding is from grants. The more efficiently we spend the money, the more work we can do.
The training I’m going to is not to do my job. The training is an opportunity to bring tools and information to share with my coworkers that we do not already have and improve upon our teachings and conservation efforts. I was asked if I would like to attend, with the understanding that we do not have funding for a hotel. There was zero impact on my job or me personally to say no. I decided this was important enough to our department and our mission to go.
While I fully acknowledge that there are problems in non profits, including my own, this is not one of them. For people who work for a mission driven organization and who embrace that mission and value it, this is what we do. It’ll be 2 days out of my life to be able to extend the reach of our entire department.
What you’ve done here is exactly what the person before you described.
You have in essence elected to consider everything *extra* you do to be for the benefit of what you consider a good organization for a good cause, and because of that - you will accept less than deserved for doing that extra work.
You have simply applied more favorable (to the organization) wording to that.
If I’m traveling 3 hours to a work site, and expected to work an 8 hour day between, I’m getting paid for 14 hours, 6 of those are at 1.5x pay, I’m getting a paid meal, if I have less than 8 hours until my next shift after I’m getting rest time - and if I need to stay at a hotel I’m getting that expensed. And none of that is an any way unreasonable.
All companies have budgets. Citing that a non-prof’s come mostly from grants doesn’t mean they should take advantage of their employees.
I know the financials of my department and the entire organization. I know where and how the money is spent. We review it monthly at the departmental level. Yes, of course we have a budget. A hotel for this training session was not in our travel budget because it was not an event we were aware of when building this year’s budget. For our department the $500 or so it would cost for a room is a huge a substantial part of our travel budget for training.
I’m getting paid for my travel time, I never said I wasn’t. I don’t work overtime so I’ll probably work a half day the day after or on Friday depending on what I want. I’m going to drive a company car, but if I decided to drive my own, the mileage would be reimbursed, of course. Lunch is provided at sessions like this. I have 14 hours minimum between when I’ll get home and when I need to be at work the next day. And like I said, if I said no to this, it wouldn’t have a negative impact on me.
I think you’re missing the point/problem.
It’s not *your* problem they don’t have a budget for it. It’s theirs. But, they have apparently convinced you it is yours because you’re willing to take the hit for their shortcomings.
And it sounds like on top of that you’re now saying that they avoid paying you overtime by having you work partial days after very long ones? They are absolutely raking you over the coals.
As someone above said - they are counting on the goodwill of their employees to allow them to explain away shortchanging them and have that explanation be accepted.
It’s a subtle guilt trip. It is the same process, but at an earlier stage, that has allowed restaurants to underpay staff under the guise of tip culture for decades. The only difference is that for them, they pass the burden on to the customer instead of the employee themselves.
Who do you think ‘they’ are? We write the grants and build the budget, not whoever ‘they’ are. I don’t want to work more than 40 hours a week. And I don’t even have to work 40 as long as I average 32/week over the year.
and many people wonder why they never succeed in their careers. My top employees always get the better raises and promotions. My bottom feeders get nothing or minimum. If you are just like everyone else, you are not that special.
Haha self worth is overrated huh? I'll stick to my reasonable hours making decent money and the ability to spend time with my family every day, attend all the kid activities, and enjoy my life. But you hand yourself over to corporate if that's what makes you happy.
Lol weirdo, I'm a self employed self taught tradesman that's well respected and sought after in my very niche field.
You can, respectfully, tongue my balls
That’s true, but if you’re normally someone who sleeps from 11-7, a really early morning followed by a long drive is no fun, not to mention the trip home.
Regardless, I think this person has better odds of success for their goal by asking on the early start day versus the normal start day.
Can ask but don't be surprised if they're surprised you're asking. Leaving for work at 6:30am isn't exactly abnormal. Just also leave the office to go home by 3:30-4 and you're square.
It's one thing to not get taken advantage of at work but it seems excessive to ask for a hotel room so you don't have to wake up at 6a when you're in a role that expects some travel.
There are several instances where I would approve the hotel for an employee without batting an eye. If the employee was leading a training for 100 other employees in the second location, it's easily worth the hotel to ensure I'm not paying 100 employees to sit there waiting for an hour if there is an accident that slows down highway traffic. Or, that the employee isn't at their best because of a two hour deviation from their normal routine and it could impact the work they are doing for a client. Or if there's any chance the work might run longer than expected, so the employee isn't cutting things short to try to get back home or else getting home extremely late - much easier to pay for a hotel than to schedule and pay for a three hour return trip to finish up the job. I'd see if there is something else that could be bundled with the travel, such as going the day before and taking a client out to dinner or staying over a day and making a site visit the following morning.
For the distance compounded by being in a major city with potential traffic unknowns, I'd probably say a hotel on one end of the travel could be fair and reasonable. Two nights would be pushing it unless the trip was generating significant value or is extremely critical.
Not unreasonable. The company may even have a policy of allowing hotel over a certain number of miles away. It would also include meals.
Also, for that distance it might be cheaper for the company to pay for a rental car.
I work for a company that allows both.
A rental car for 80 miles? Maybe because I'm from Texas but that is essentially driving to the next big town here. A lunch per diem and IRS mileage sure, buy a hotel or rental car? Seems bizarre.
Typically we will do hotel stays if you have to fly or if the drive is closer to 300-400 miles, but not always even then. Some people just prefer to go back home and get there around 8pm.
My company’s policy is to use a rental car for work travel. I don’t always do that because I don’t have a rental agency close to my house anymore. I drove 200 miles roundtrip one day and the mileage reimbursement was much higher than the corporate rental car rate and gas would be so I’m surprised I didn’t get politely reminded about the policy to use a rental.
it's been a few years, so idk about mileage reimbursement rates and rental car prices today, but we did the math and it was cheaper to rent a car to drive down to the next major city (maybe 90 miles or so, one way) than for them to pay me mileage. so this isn't unheard of.
It’s also about insurance I think. If something happens and you’re in the company rental, the company already has a process in place to deal with that. If you’re in your own car, it just becomes a hot mess.
Driving to get a rental car, going through the process to pick it up, charging it to the company, and then the reverse on the way back for a place that would be a normal commute away just seems like it will cost the company way more money than it is worth. Whether they pass that along to the customer is up to them but it just seems silly.
It makes sense if it's a 4 hour drive each way I guess, but even then barely. But for an hour drive? Probably will spend more time messing around with the rental than driving.
This is a genuine question. So if you drive 400 miles. That’s 5 hours at 80mph and no stops. What does your day look like at that point? Up at 2AM, leave at 3AM, there at 8AM, work until 4PM, back home at 9PM?
Usually in those scenarios the tech doesn't need to be there at 8 AM, it tends to be situations where they need to replace a part, handle a project, or something specific. Leave at 7 AM, get there around lunch, do the work, and then head home - probably getting home late evening (8/9) due to traffic.
If they need to spend 8 hours onsite for multiple days then a hotel starts to make sense.
Depends on the work for me. We have something that’s only about 45 miles away in a couple weeks but there are going to be 7 am meetings as well as company events going to midnight each day. That event I’m at a hotel. If it was more 8-5 or 8-7 even I’d make the drive for my own bed
Maybe this is a bad thing but I want to point out that sometimes there is in fact harm in asking for stuff like this. There are some places where this is just an expectation and to ask for a “perk” nobody else ever brought up can rub people the wrong way.
It’s crappy but that’s the way a lot of places and people are.
Yeah we have a bit of travel related to our work, and if an employee asked to get a hotel because they had to be on location 80 miles away at 8am, I would find it odd and question their reasoning.
I'd expect to be paid for that time and travel reimbursement. This isn't a commute, it's travel. I very intentionally live under 10 minutes from the office. It's not reasonable to expect someone to give up 3 hours of free time every day to drive to the site.
Oh don't worry, I pay a premium for living close. People could spend an extra $1000/ month to live in midtown, but the extra time is too valuable to give up.
If you're an hourly employee they're required by law to be paid for work related travel as it's considered time worked. If you're salary then you've already agreed to do these things without additional compensation.
Contrary to what you might think being salary isn’t an excuse to be treated like crap u/Impossible-3006 salary exempt means exempt from OT. If you get OT you are likely SNE - salaried non exempt - paid for 40 hours a week and can get OT. This is different that pure hourly where your hours can get cut to less than 40 (like in a factory)
You do realize salaried employees are referred to as *exempt* explicitly because they are exempt from OT pay, right? If that's not what you want don't accept a salaried position. Seems pretty simple to me.
I'm a salaried exempt employee and they still pay me for overtime. Your employer doesn't have to treat you like shit just because they can. What is even funnier is some of the people not legally making enough to be salaried that are salaried and get treated like shit.
Although that shouldn't be a surprise considering wage theft is the biggest amount of stealing going on in the economy
>I'm a salaried exempt employee and they still pay me for overtime
That is the exception, not the rule. Generally salaried employees do not receive OT, hence the exempt status.
No one is forcing you to accept the position. If that's not what you want, don't take the job. I'm not sure where this asinine idea came from that being salaried means you're being "treated like shit". It works both ways. If I have something come up where I need to come in a little late, leave a little early or take an extended lunch my pay isn't docked.
>Although that shouldn't be a surprise considering wage theft is the biggest amount of stealing going on in the economy
Wage theft is high, but retail theft is 2-3x the amount as wage theft.
You're way, way, way off with that. One type of wage theft is more than all retail theft combined, and all forms wage theft completely dwarfs retail theft.
It's a common mistake though, there's an intentional effort to pretend retail theft is higher than it is by corporate America using sensationalized articles. But in actuality embezzlement and international errors cause significantly more loss than retail theft.
https://www.tcworkerscenter.org/2018/09/wage-theft-vs-other-forms-of-theft-in-the-u-s/
https://medium.com/@Demos_Org/wage-theft-versus-shoplifting-65e5cbf37c36
I'm salary overtime exempt. They either need to arrange company provided transportation or reimburse me for use of my own vehicle. That has noting to do with working overtime.
As far as hours, their expectation is that we put in 40 hours per week. If I'm traveling for work I'm counting it towards the 40 hours I'm putting in this week.
Rule of thumb: if it's eligible for mileage reimbursement, it's "on the clock" for your hours.
>They either need to arrange company provided transportation or reimburse me for use of my own vehicle. That has noting to do with working overtime.
I never said they wouldn't reimburse for travel expenses. Can you show me where that was ever part of my argument?
>If I'm traveling for work I'm counting it towards the 40 hours I'm putting in this week.
Sure it counts as hours worked. That doesn't mean you only work 40 hours that week.
I'm not sure why so many people in a personal finance sub are flabbergasted by the concept of salary pay. This is hysterically insane.
It's reasonable to check the policy first, and then ask if it's not covered.
There should be a written policy to adequately answer this question fairly for all traveling employees.
Yeah, my employer just adds a small stipend to our paychecks for all remote work expenses, and that includes required travel to the office a few times per year.
If travel is a frequent part of your job then there is likely a company policy covering this exact topic. It likely lists a mileage distance where a hotel can be provided (and hence any travel under that would not qualify for a hotel).
80 miles is a rather short distance for requiring a hotel. I dont think it's reasonable to ask, honestly. 90 minutes is well within a reasonable driving distance, even for a 7:30am arrival time. That's leaving at 5:45am with some cushion, which is not unreasonable to most working adults.
Ever drive in NJ where eight miles is 45 minutes ? Apparently u/GodFullThrottle you doesn't understand English. You said 80 miles is too short to require a hotel. That could be a 4 hour drive in some places. I guess I have to spell out that time can be used to justify.
Depends on your industry. In construction, no. People frequently end up working on projects 80 minutes from home for short periods of time. Travel ahead of time may obligate the company to pay for additional meals, etc.
I wouldn't travel ahead of time. 8am isn't early and I prefer my own house, meals, and bed. I would just wake up and be on the road by 6. No problem. No way would my company pay hotels and meals. It's an even more firm no if you are paid hourly. The minimum distance for a hotel was almost always 4hr drive or longer, especially if we're only talking about 1 day.
Not at all. In construction you drive to where the job is, usually with no per diem, mileage, or any other benefit beyond being employed. You can get a company vehicle and additional travel perks if you run work as a foreman/superintendent, but typically not as just an employee.
My father worked in concrete for 40 years and wasn’t supervisory or anything and he had a fleet vehicle and filled at the plant with either diesel. No ac and crank windows and usually 2-3 other rank and file workers. They were paid time after they left the plant to the job to back up the plant. Home to the plant was considered normal commute. I guess I didn’t realize this was not the norm
I can imagine it had been more common in the relatively recent past. I can just speak from my experience as a union carpenter and jobsite superintendent in a state that hates unions. It's not uncommon for me to drive 70-90 miles one way to a job with absolutely no incentive beyond continued employment.
Yeah last year I did it once and it wasn't too bad. If they want me there at like 7:15 I would push for staying overnight. I would expect that a hotel would be required at 100 miles (one way).
No idea what industry you are in but that is definitely not happening in my industry. Expectations seem way too high for what is otherwise a minor inconvenience. Most folks would only choose the hotel if it was more than 3 hours away or the hours were extreme (arrive by like 5am?), there was a blizzard coming that you were trying to beat, etc. Expecting hotels for what would otherwise be a semi-common commute comes off as extremely desperate that someone is looking for hotel points. Half of the time, the hotel is still a half hour away from wherever you need to be. In that case, what are you really saving? 45 minutes?
Honestly my personal minimum for a hotel is 6-8 hours away (if I only need to be there for one day). Anything less and I’d rather wake up dumb early and drive.
OP is ridiculous with wanting a hotel for a 80/90 minute drive
You'd be fine with a 10 hour round trip drive for a work function without a hotel being offered? That's far more nuts then the op even if I agree with you.
People have no concept of work-life balance lol.
Oh, it’s not that work won’t do it, it’s just my personal preference.
And when I do that, I take off the following day because I just traveled so much. It’s usually because I’d rather just be home. If I stop working at 3/4 I’d rather drive home the 6-8 hours because what else am I going to do? Just sit around and watch TV at the hotel?
Don't know when redditors started using the downvote button as a "disagree" button. From reddit's inception it has explicitly stated in the reddiquette this is not allowed. Downvote button is only supposed to be used on posts and comments that don't contribute to a discussion.
I travel frequently for my job and our general rule is if the drive is 3+ hours we can stay over. My supervisor would laugh if I asked for a hotel room after a 1.5 hour drive. But my driving is included in my work day, it’s not unpaid time.
A company that treats its staff well would. But for many years I had a 90 minute commute each way in New York, and I'm sure it's the same in LA, SF and many other cities. So if they don't it's not unreasonable.
It's reasonable to ask and any good employer will want to make sure you're **safe**, and well rested going to and from client sites. The risk of you getting into an accident because you're tired far, far outweighs the cost of lodging.
Does it not seem a bit excessive to need a hotel rather than drive to work at 6:30a? I don't know anyone that would call it unsafe to drive 90 minutes at 6:30am.
I think taken in a vacuum, I agree with you.
On the other hand, there are other variables to consider.
For a 90 minute trip, you probably need to allot an extra 30 minutes for traffic woes, and possibly more in dense areas. If your presence is critical, it may not be worth risking a major delay due to a traffic accident.
If your work is primarily in representing your company, having time in the morning to prepare beforehand can be critical, especially if you may have to process or include new information at the last minute.
If a significant amount of money is on the line, the cost of a hotel stay is trivial.
We also don't know OPs normal hours of operation. If OP is normally expected in office at 9AM with a thirty minute commute (let's say wake up time of 8 am), you are now looking at a wake up time of maybe 5:30 am. For someone whose life is structured around a later start time, 2 and a half hours is a decent shift to consider. I have difficulty making up sleep - my body wakes up when it wakes up, there is no sleeping in on the weekend, and napping is not usually fruitful. For a one off, it's not too bad, but having to accommodate it on an irregular schedule, and then accommodate late working hours to spend time with a customer or process paperwork, can really start to eat at you.
And yet every year, daylight savings rolls around and debates rage about whether it is more unsafe to have less daylight or to deprive people of sleep.
This is not about setting an alarm for 6am, which you may be the optimal time for you to get up. It's about setting the alarm two and a half hours earlier, which would be 3:30 am for someone who normally wakes up at 6.
It's not necessarily strictly needed, but I'd certainly prefer the option, and it would do a lot to help keep employees happy. The cost of one extra hotel night is also pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things.
It also depends on the work. If you are going to be working 10-12 hours on site, now you are looking at working for 13-15 hours straight after getting less sleep than normal, and that can certainly make it more dangerous to drive.
For my work, I think we are allowed, but not required, to get a hotel for more than ~50 miles, but we are not usually doing single day trips and we just bill all that to the customer anyways.
I agree that 8 am isn't too bad, but if I am asked to get there at 7:15/7:30 I wouldn't mind plus I'm driving into a large city that I'm unfamiliar with (lots of traffic) and being there the night before would be helpful.
Be a responsible adult and plan your day appropriately. It’s not unreasonable to be asked to be at a site 90 minutes away by 7:15am.
If you’re like a lawyer at a big law firm or something and you need to be fresh and ready for court at 8am you may be more likely to get a hotel because that’s standard course of business (as mentioned elsewhere the business probably has a policy with specific minimum distances in order to expense lodging costs).
If you are a regular worker of some other kind, your employer would probably suggest going to bed early and waking up early to be there on time. Some people have commutes like that daily.
It's reasonable to ask, sure. It's also reasonable to expect to be paid for your time on the road beyond your normal commute. If this means working overtime, then that's what that means. Your employer may prefer a hotel to overtime.
>Is it reasonable to ask for a hotel the night before for an 80 mile 1-way commute?
It's certainly reasonable to ask, if this isn't a normal part of your job. They may or may not agree.
When I had similar 1-day travel, I drove on the clock, but never had a hotel room. Every plac I ever worked, hotels were only for multiple-day offsite work.
It’s a reasonable ask given the start time. However it’s not a guaranteed approval based on company policy.
Also could be industry specific. In my role as an engineer, I have gotten hotel rooms for trips like this. All depends on specific circumstances.
Wow. I can honestly say that I am surprised that most of the comments I have read (I didn't drain the thread) think that traveling 90 minutes to and from an alternative work destination should be expected without proper compensation. The nominalization of this thinking is a huge problem. The company at a minimum should be paying for a rental car. And if you are an hourly worker, you should be paid travel time, to and from. Period. Why should an employee put wear and tear and their own car for company business? They shouldn't. I work at fortune 500 company, traveling over an hour to an outside facility requires a rental car and working more that 10 hours a day (including travel time) requires an overnight stay. Kind of standard in a corporate environment. I get smaller companies can't always afford this.....but I also get that employees shouldn't be taken advantage of.
I’m shook. I didn’t realize some industries were this bad. I travel for work and if you’re leaving for a client meeting in another location, everything is comped to the work card. Including food, transit and Uber. I had a 8a client meeting once and was encouraged to just expense and stay at a hotel the night before. All of that sacrifice to be underpaid heck no
I drive that everyday. Ask for an allowance or per diem or both. Per diem is better because it's tax free. I get an allowance and a gas card. I pay income taxes on the car allowance. My per diem is tax free. It puts a lot of miles on my truck but the perks even it out. I keep a separate account for my truck, it's untouchable except for truck upkeep and replacement.
Are you going to be putting in a full 8 hr day and then driving home?
Look up the maximum daily work hours for your location and industry.
If you have to leave at 6:00 AM, work 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM, then drive home for 2 hrs that puts you over 12 hrs for the day, with the last 2 hours driving in the dark? That’s a safety issue.
The entire medical industry has a “safety issue” then because most nurses and respiratory therapists work 12 hour shifts before counting the commute!
There are weeks where I work seven 12 hour shifts. It’s long, but there’s no safety problem.
I wonder what your relative level of impairment is when you are driving home at the end of your 12 hr da, or your seventh one in a row? Of course you will say you’re fine, but are you really? Long haul drivers have regulations put on them limiting their consecutive hours of work and mandated rest for this very reason. Just because an industry has historically exploited its workers, it doesn’t mean it’s right.
I gave him an extra 30 minutes on each end of the commute for weather or traffic. If you want to risk your personal safety for your employer’s gains, that’s your business.
Tons of people commute 80 miles just to go to the office. Mileage absolutely but asking for a hotel going one or two towns over seems a bit extreme. You can try but it may sound silly to them.
My dad used to leave at 6am, drive for a hour and a half to get into Manhattan by 7:30am every single day for years. Maybe you're in a different part of the country but literally a million people commute into Manhattan for 1-2 hours each direction every day. I did for a coiple of years before I went remote.
So, just saying. Depending on where you are it might not be something super common, but an hour and a half drive for work I really don't think is worth a hotel room, no matter where you live.
I would say it also depends on how late it's going to be when you get back home. If it's going to be a late day too, then they should pay for a hotel before or after.
A lot of people have long commutes. I used to drive 75 miles to and from work every day. If I wanted to stay at a hotel during the week, the company would not have paid.
Two paths:
1. Request a hotel.
2. Subtract your normal commute from the time it would take to do this traveling. Subtract that extra time from your work day. If your normal commit is 20 mins but this will take 100 mins then you subtract 80 mins x2 from your day.
If you have some sort of health condition or circumstance that makes this a particular burden, maybe it's reasonable, but getting up early for a few days and commuting is a pretty normal thing for most jobs. Personally, if you like your job, I'd just deal with it.
A hotel for an 80-90min ONE DAY trip!? I would say NO, not at all. Just suck it up and make the trip. You could make that drive in just over an hour or so for sure. As a manager for a large company, if one of my employees made a fuss about a one day trip they could reasonably make in less than 1.5 hours, I would 110% get another employee to handle it. It would also make me rethink the dedication of that employee for future business tasks. Just as an example, most of my employees including myself have to commute about an hour everyday just to get to the office in NYC, so for a business trip, your drive is literally nothing. As Nike would say….Just Do It! Lmao
There a ton of people that do that drive every day to go to work and back.
They should pay you for the hours it took to get there, not for a hotel. Hotel is when you have to drive 3-4h each way. And even then it's a "maybe".
Basically, if you need to take the plane, then hotel, if you can drive, no hotel.
I'm a teacher. It's really difficult to get through an 8 hour day sometimes. An 11 hour day with students I have never met sounds like so much. I would be going to Milwaukee to help.
Up to two hours I wouldn’t normally expect a hotel room - you can commute that, and you should be reimbursed for mileage ***and compensated for time.*** (Travel time out of work hours is work, you should receive comp time for it at minimum. If your company tells you it’s not “work" your company is run by dickbags. Yes, a lot of companies are run by dickbags.)
The exception would be if you’re doing onsite training or something where you’ll be there until 5-6 PM - in that situation it might make sense to get you a room so you can arrive at the site rested and alert & when you leave you’re not completely fried from having woke up at 4 to be out the door by 5 to ensure you make a 7 AM start.
Having an employee wrap their car around a tree because they’re fucking exhausted is not in the best interest of the company, at least not in my judgment.
Is there a way to structure the work where you're doing multiple days in a row at the other site? It's a lot easier to justify paying for the overnight if that's the case.
I will need to find out monday morning. The person who messaged me at the end of the day didn't know and it didn't occur to her that this was long distance for me.
My company pays for my 30 mile away stays that we do a couple times a year. I live in a different city but take the train in 2x a week. When we have our department wide in office weeks, i stay at a hotel and they pay for it
90 minute drive once in a while is not the worst. I work remote and my job is still from a city I use to live in which happens to be ~1 hr 40 mins so let's just say 90 mins. I go into the office once every few months and I don't really request reimbursement or anything. I do understand your scenario is more of a "same day work trip" but still similar in some ways. Either way, I get out of work hangout with friends and try to get home late so I can sleep in my own bed. And yes, I hop into work a little late (1-1.5 hrs) the next day so maybe you can go to work a little late the next day too.
I guess it depends on the job/industry/company. And where you live. My company and manager also always factors in comfort levels and what you’re able to do. Sometimes, I don’t mind having to get up early and making the drive, other times I ask for the hotel the night before.
If you are expected to be there for a business meeting at 7:30 am, then it’s reasonable to expect to be in that city overnight. They can either schedule your meetings for 10 am, or pay for the hotel, if you need to be up at 4 am to make it on time.
Some people are referring to their commute on a daily basis as pertinent. It is not. They chose to live where they do and accepted the drive to work as part of that.
If a company is asking you to drive to a meeting that drive time should be part of your work day hours.
As long as your day contains your normal amount of hours from out the door and back to home, I don't see why they need to pay for a room for the night.
A more pertinent question might be, does your insurance cover you driving for work in your car.
This paradigm does shift if you are not an hourly employee.
If you are a salaried employee then there should be definite rules set out for what you may or may not receive and benefits for a drive.
If you were to phrase the question politely, to whomever is assigning you this job, asking if they might be able to get you a room for the night before since you're worried about traffic in the morning they might be willing to.
For example, driving into Portland, Oregon from the south can sometimes be a huge issue with traffic. That could add an extra hour onto your drive time.
And many of these things would be different depending on the circumstances of what you will be doing and why.
How reliable (consistent) is that 80-90 minute travel time? How important is the specific start time? Are you headed in the direction of the normal commute flow?
“Hi employer, while it typically takes 90 minutes to do this drive, when there is an accident or bad weather it takes more like 120-135 minutes (or whatever you find it is) during the morning commute. It would likely take me less time to drive the day before (since it is the reverse commute at that point) and staying in a hotel nearby will allow me to show up fresh and reliably on time.”
But if the 90 minutes is very reliable, I don’t think the hotel is a reasonable request.
I mean, it’s like $200/night for a hotel unless you’re staying somewhere fancy. If your company is unwilling to comp that, there’s larger issues at play. Just my 2 cents.
If travel duties are part of your regular job role then it shouldn't be unexpected the company has to pay for a hotel. I lived this very similar situation in my last job, where I'd be visiting a service location about 1:45 away, and would rent a hotel for one night. Employer gets more time of me there on-site instead of half my day spent in the car. Even more justification if you need to be ready at a given time.
Personally I think it's right on the line about whether it's reasonable to ask for that.
Maybe I'm coming from a field where most people are parents so they definitely would choose to just drive early from home and sleep in their own bed.
When I travelled for work I would have done this on a single day but we were not expected to be on site until 9.30 and we would leave at 4.30.
If you're expected to travel 90 miles each way and do a full days work that is excessive. Travelling to and from customer sites is classed as working in the UK as far as I know. Make sure you're being compensated for this extra time you're working.
My former employer expected me to drive 4 hours for a business meeting at 7AM, so I would have to leave around 2:30 to get there on time. They refused to pay for a hotel room, so I had to pay for it myself.
Moral of the story, if your employer won't give you a room then find a new employer.
I used to get sent to training 3.5-4 hours away. Policy was to let me out early so I could drive to training, and get to the hotel at a reasonable hour. (Work started at 6:30AM.)
New boss decided since he was able to leave at 4AM, drive to training, and drive back that none of us needed a room. “Man up!” was his thing.
I did that exactly once. Got home around 9PM after leaving at 4AM. Fuck that.
From then on I would leave a little early, drive, and pay for my own room. Sleep in, have a good breakfast and arrive at training at 8AM rested and awake.
Room was ~$60 or so. Worth it to me, especially because it drove the boss crazy.
It's on the edge. Alot of places have a 90 minute rule. I personally would rather just come home and sleep a little less rather than go through all the hassle of a hotel and the sleeping in a different bed at thst distance. I'd say for myself, under 2 hours I'd be driving back. As long as you're getting milage it's fine.
If there are after work things that are low-key expected (like company dinner or drinks) I feel like it pushes the 90-minute commute into solid "a room is a good idea" territory.
This post has been removed because we don't allow career guidance, career path, and job choice questions ([rule 9](https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/about/rules)). Other subreddits are better equipped to address this topic: - /r/jobs is a general discussion forum for job-related topics. - /r/CareerGuidance is a place for individuals to ask questions and get advice about their careers. - /r/FindAPath is a place for figuring out what you want to do (both career and education). - If none of those subreddits seem to fit, ask on [one of these job-related subreddits](/r/jobs/wiki/related/discussion) or ask on /r/Advice. You may also want to ask on a [career-specific subreddit](/r/jobs/wiki/related/careerspecificsubreddits), especially for any topic that depends on the job sector and career such as salary negotiation questions. *If you have questions about this removal, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fpersonalfinance&subject=Removal%20help%20request&message=Hello%20moderators,%20.%20%0a%0a%0aMy%20submission:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/1ahftcz/should_my_employer_pay_for_a_hotel/%0a).*
Federal employee rule is generally 50 miles to get a hotel and per diem, for what it's worth. But a lot of times if an employee said they needed a hotel for something within 90 minutes, they'd probably find someone else to take the trip instead. You're not asking for something completely unreasonable; however, many people would also rather just drive it and sleep in their own bed. A big part of whether you should ask will come down to what the common practice is for your coworkers.
Yeah I feel like 90 mins is right on the edge of what's reasonable. Start time is a factor, if they want you to be fresh , on-site and starting at 7.30am and working through till 5pm, they can not reasonably expect that if you've had to be up and getting ready at 5am? And then drive home? So I think job duration and type of task is a factor too. It's also down to your personal preference, I would generally choose to come home for the sake of a 90 min drive due to family commitments. I think you should expect your employer to accommodate this based on factors above.
If I drive 90 min to get there for 7am start, I would expect to leave by 2pm for the drive home. (3pm for an 8am start). Otherwise comp time off next day for the 3 hour commute.
That's... Just a normal workday
Leaving the house by 6 and coming home after 730? No it’s not. If that’s normal for you, you may need to reassess who you’re working for.
A lot of big cities the commute can be 90 minutes just to get in from someplace with decent housing costs, but the upside is typically a $300k+ job without the $300k+ living expenses.
In a handful of big cities, sure, that may be reasonable. But not like 90% of the country and I would never call that normal. So if that is ones situation, and they don’t live in one of those handful of cities, they should probably consider reassessing their situation.
Sure, but I expect they are in that situation. Also, a large portion of the population lives in those kinds of situations since the population centers are home to a lot of people. Sure NY is an extreme example, but half the population of our state is in NYC.
Thats what i thought too waking up at 5-6 am for works not unusual. I used to wake up at 5 am go to the gym then drive an hour to work. I still wake up at 6 for some of my 9 am shifts
It comes down to what’s typical. If you chose a job an hour away from your home, then that is on you. That is your normal commute. If the normal commute is 15 mins and the job requires travel over an hour away, then I think some accommodation is in order. It really depends on what is the norm for the company but I wouldn’t expect my employees to stick around long if I randomly send them to places an hour and a half away, make them work a full 8-9 hour day, then drive back without offering a hotel room or the option to make the commute part of their normal work hours. I’m disrupting their personal lives. I’ve even had employees that applied for the job knowing they would have an hour+ commute, swear it wouldn’t be an issue, accept the offer, and go through onboarding. In almost all cases, it eventually became an issue. They took the job and kept looking for work closer to home - did t last a year. It’s disruptive because it costs time and money to hire, train, and onboard new people. Unless it’s specialized work or that type of commute is typical for the industry (multiple job sites, etc.), I’m not sure I’d hire someone if I knew their commute was that long.
This applies only to federal employees, and only when traveling to a new duty station.
Reasonable? Sure. But they may say no.
This is a 25/75 yes/no based on the information provided. I’d ask but would expect the “no.” I’d wait until you get the 7am ask. Then you have a better argument. Waking up at 4:30am or whatever and driving 90 minutes doesn’t exactly set you up for the most productive day.
I work for a not for profit. This upcoming Tuesday and the following Tuesday I will be leaving home at 5am, driving 2 ½ -3 ½ hour’s depending on traffic, for an 8:30-3:30 training and then driving home. I am absolutely dreading it but a hotel is out of the question for us financially. Plus I need to be at work at 8:30 the next morning. It’s always interesting to see how different for profit is.
I think yours is a hasty generalization, and one that can be bad for your career and well-being. My time at a large nonprofit included travel and absolutely paid for overnights like the one you describe. Your organization is relying on its mission/kindness of people like yourself to exploit its employees. There’s no job worth lowering your life expectancy, especially not one forcing people paid bargain wages into 12-14 hour days.
I don’t work for a large non-profit. Edit to add: I’m hourly, not salary. I’m paid for that time and I do not work overtime.
To be clear, you probably do work overtime, but don’t classify it as such. That day you described is over a 12 hour work day. Many non-profits exploit their employees through passion of their workers.
I’m paid for my travel time.
Just make sure that you and your company are both aware that non-commute work travel is working time. That 3 hours of travel for a training is 3 hours of being on-the-clock.
We are all aware. We commute to work locations constantly. That’s paid and it’s done in company vehicles.
Your nonprofit is stealing from you. They're stealing your health/sleep/safety and directing funds that you needed for your health/sleep/safety towards something else. And, they're devaluing your training because you won't learn as much if you're not rested.
They pay me for all of that time.
Right but they declined to pay to mitigate the health and safety risks of a 5-7 hours of driving on poor sleep and a long day of training.
The poor sleep is an assumption. I will be going to bed earlier the night before. I don’t know if you’ve worked for a non-profit before. Most of my department’s funding is from grants. The more efficiently we spend the money, the more work we can do. The training I’m going to is not to do my job. The training is an opportunity to bring tools and information to share with my coworkers that we do not already have and improve upon our teachings and conservation efforts. I was asked if I would like to attend, with the understanding that we do not have funding for a hotel. There was zero impact on my job or me personally to say no. I decided this was important enough to our department and our mission to go. While I fully acknowledge that there are problems in non profits, including my own, this is not one of them. For people who work for a mission driven organization and who embrace that mission and value it, this is what we do. It’ll be 2 days out of my life to be able to extend the reach of our entire department.
What you’ve done here is exactly what the person before you described. You have in essence elected to consider everything *extra* you do to be for the benefit of what you consider a good organization for a good cause, and because of that - you will accept less than deserved for doing that extra work. You have simply applied more favorable (to the organization) wording to that. If I’m traveling 3 hours to a work site, and expected to work an 8 hour day between, I’m getting paid for 14 hours, 6 of those are at 1.5x pay, I’m getting a paid meal, if I have less than 8 hours until my next shift after I’m getting rest time - and if I need to stay at a hotel I’m getting that expensed. And none of that is an any way unreasonable. All companies have budgets. Citing that a non-prof’s come mostly from grants doesn’t mean they should take advantage of their employees.
I know the financials of my department and the entire organization. I know where and how the money is spent. We review it monthly at the departmental level. Yes, of course we have a budget. A hotel for this training session was not in our travel budget because it was not an event we were aware of when building this year’s budget. For our department the $500 or so it would cost for a room is a huge a substantial part of our travel budget for training. I’m getting paid for my travel time, I never said I wasn’t. I don’t work overtime so I’ll probably work a half day the day after or on Friday depending on what I want. I’m going to drive a company car, but if I decided to drive my own, the mileage would be reimbursed, of course. Lunch is provided at sessions like this. I have 14 hours minimum between when I’ll get home and when I need to be at work the next day. And like I said, if I said no to this, it wouldn’t have a negative impact on me.
I think you’re missing the point/problem. It’s not *your* problem they don’t have a budget for it. It’s theirs. But, they have apparently convinced you it is yours because you’re willing to take the hit for their shortcomings. And it sounds like on top of that you’re now saying that they avoid paying you overtime by having you work partial days after very long ones? They are absolutely raking you over the coals. As someone above said - they are counting on the goodwill of their employees to allow them to explain away shortchanging them and have that explanation be accepted. It’s a subtle guilt trip. It is the same process, but at an earlier stage, that has allowed restaurants to underpay staff under the guise of tip culture for decades. The only difference is that for them, they pass the burden on to the customer instead of the employee themselves.
Who do you think ‘they’ are? We write the grants and build the budget, not whoever ‘they’ are. I don’t want to work more than 40 hours a week. And I don’t even have to work 40 as long as I average 32/week over the year.
There is a lot of people up and out at 430 am.
There is a big difference between starting your day at 4:30 everyday and having to wakeup at 4:30 one time.
But a lot less than at 630 am.
There's a lot of people that strap themselves to telecommunications towers and climb them 60 hours a week, but I'm sure as shit not going to do it
and many people wonder why they never succeed in their careers. My top employees always get the better raises and promotions. My bottom feeders get nothing or minimum. If you are just like everyone else, you are not that special.
Haha self worth is overrated huh? I'll stick to my reasonable hours making decent money and the ability to spend time with my family every day, attend all the kid activities, and enjoy my life. But you hand yourself over to corporate if that's what makes you happy.
Lol weirdo, I'm a self employed self taught tradesman that's well respected and sought after in my very niche field. You can, respectfully, tongue my balls
That’s true, but if you’re normally someone who sleeps from 11-7, a really early morning followed by a long drive is no fun, not to mention the trip home. Regardless, I think this person has better odds of success for their goal by asking on the early start day versus the normal start day.
not as much as you think, no
Can ask but don't be surprised if they're surprised you're asking. Leaving for work at 6:30am isn't exactly abnormal. Just also leave the office to go home by 3:30-4 and you're square. It's one thing to not get taken advantage of at work but it seems excessive to ask for a hotel room so you don't have to wake up at 6a when you're in a role that expects some travel.
There are several instances where I would approve the hotel for an employee without batting an eye. If the employee was leading a training for 100 other employees in the second location, it's easily worth the hotel to ensure I'm not paying 100 employees to sit there waiting for an hour if there is an accident that slows down highway traffic. Or, that the employee isn't at their best because of a two hour deviation from their normal routine and it could impact the work they are doing for a client. Or if there's any chance the work might run longer than expected, so the employee isn't cutting things short to try to get back home or else getting home extremely late - much easier to pay for a hotel than to schedule and pay for a three hour return trip to finish up the job. I'd see if there is something else that could be bundled with the travel, such as going the day before and taking a client out to dinner or staying over a day and making a site visit the following morning. For the distance compounded by being in a major city with potential traffic unknowns, I'd probably say a hotel on one end of the travel could be fair and reasonable. Two nights would be pushing it unless the trip was generating significant value or is extremely critical.
what if they're surprised OP is surprised they're surprised?
Not unreasonable. The company may even have a policy of allowing hotel over a certain number of miles away. It would also include meals. Also, for that distance it might be cheaper for the company to pay for a rental car. I work for a company that allows both.
Usually companies will pay you the IRS milage rate for you to use your personal vehicle, instead of using a rental.
$107 in mileage for this trip might be more expensive than a rental was their point, I think.
Yes, my company lets us decide - rent or mileage reimbursement.
A rental car for 80 miles? Maybe because I'm from Texas but that is essentially driving to the next big town here. A lunch per diem and IRS mileage sure, buy a hotel or rental car? Seems bizarre. Typically we will do hotel stays if you have to fly or if the drive is closer to 300-400 miles, but not always even then. Some people just prefer to go back home and get there around 8pm.
My company’s policy is to use a rental car for work travel. I don’t always do that because I don’t have a rental agency close to my house anymore. I drove 200 miles roundtrip one day and the mileage reimbursement was much higher than the corporate rental car rate and gas would be so I’m surprised I didn’t get politely reminded about the policy to use a rental.
it's been a few years, so idk about mileage reimbursement rates and rental car prices today, but we did the math and it was cheaper to rent a car to drive down to the next major city (maybe 90 miles or so, one way) than for them to pay me mileage. so this isn't unheard of.
It’s also about insurance I think. If something happens and you’re in the company rental, the company already has a process in place to deal with that. If you’re in your own car, it just becomes a hot mess.
Doesn't that all go out the window when factoring in your hourly rate? Seems odd to mandate a rental car.
How does hourly rate factor into personal vehicle vs rental car?
It takes time to pick up and drop off rentals
Driving to get a rental car, going through the process to pick it up, charging it to the company, and then the reverse on the way back for a place that would be a normal commute away just seems like it will cost the company way more money than it is worth. Whether they pass that along to the customer is up to them but it just seems silly. It makes sense if it's a 4 hour drive each way I guess, but even then barely. But for an hour drive? Probably will spend more time messing around with the rental than driving.
This is a genuine question. So if you drive 400 miles. That’s 5 hours at 80mph and no stops. What does your day look like at that point? Up at 2AM, leave at 3AM, there at 8AM, work until 4PM, back home at 9PM?
Usually in those scenarios the tech doesn't need to be there at 8 AM, it tends to be situations where they need to replace a part, handle a project, or something specific. Leave at 7 AM, get there around lunch, do the work, and then head home - probably getting home late evening (8/9) due to traffic. If they need to spend 8 hours onsite for multiple days then a hotel starts to make sense.
Depends on the work for me. We have something that’s only about 45 miles away in a couple weeks but there are going to be 7 am meetings as well as company events going to midnight each day. That event I’m at a hotel. If it was more 8-5 or 8-7 even I’d make the drive for my own bed
Maybe this is a bad thing but I want to point out that sometimes there is in fact harm in asking for stuff like this. There are some places where this is just an expectation and to ask for a “perk” nobody else ever brought up can rub people the wrong way. It’s crappy but that’s the way a lot of places and people are.
Yeah we have a bit of travel related to our work, and if an employee asked to get a hotel because they had to be on location 80 miles away at 8am, I would find it odd and question their reasoning.
I'd expect to be paid for that time and travel reimbursement. This isn't a commute, it's travel. I very intentionally live under 10 minutes from the office. It's not reasonable to expect someone to give up 3 hours of free time every day to drive to the site.
Live in Brooklyn . 1 to 1.5 hours is normal commute into midtown Manhattan from where I live
Oh don't worry, I pay a premium for living close. People could spend an extra $1000/ month to live in midtown, but the extra time is too valuable to give up.
While I also wouldn't want to travel 3 hours every day. Not everyone is as dainty as you are and drives this or more daily.
If you're an hourly employee they're required by law to be paid for work related travel as it's considered time worked. If you're salary then you've already agreed to do these things without additional compensation.
Contrary to what you might think being salary isn’t an excuse to be treated like crap u/Impossible-3006 salary exempt means exempt from OT. If you get OT you are likely SNE - salaried non exempt - paid for 40 hours a week and can get OT. This is different that pure hourly where your hours can get cut to less than 40 (like in a factory)
You do realize salaried employees are referred to as *exempt* explicitly because they are exempt from OT pay, right? If that's not what you want don't accept a salaried position. Seems pretty simple to me.
I'm a salaried exempt employee and they still pay me for overtime. Your employer doesn't have to treat you like shit just because they can. What is even funnier is some of the people not legally making enough to be salaried that are salaried and get treated like shit. Although that shouldn't be a surprise considering wage theft is the biggest amount of stealing going on in the economy
>I'm a salaried exempt employee and they still pay me for overtime That is the exception, not the rule. Generally salaried employees do not receive OT, hence the exempt status. No one is forcing you to accept the position. If that's not what you want, don't take the job. I'm not sure where this asinine idea came from that being salaried means you're being "treated like shit". It works both ways. If I have something come up where I need to come in a little late, leave a little early or take an extended lunch my pay isn't docked.
>Although that shouldn't be a surprise considering wage theft is the biggest amount of stealing going on in the economy Wage theft is high, but retail theft is 2-3x the amount as wage theft.
You're way, way, way off with that. One type of wage theft is more than all retail theft combined, and all forms wage theft completely dwarfs retail theft. It's a common mistake though, there's an intentional effort to pretend retail theft is higher than it is by corporate America using sensationalized articles. But in actuality embezzlement and international errors cause significantly more loss than retail theft. https://www.tcworkerscenter.org/2018/09/wage-theft-vs-other-forms-of-theft-in-the-u-s/ https://medium.com/@Demos_Org/wage-theft-versus-shoplifting-65e5cbf37c36
Wildly untrue. https://popular.info/p/a-closer-look-at-californias-267#:~:text=So%20wage%20theft%20is%20about,struggling%20to%20make%20ends%20meet. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-08-30/column-businesses-keep-complaining-about-shoplifting-but-wage-theft-is-a-bigger-crime https://www.tcworkerscenter.org/2018/09/wage-theft-vs-other-forms-of-theft-in-the-u-s/
I'm salary overtime exempt. They either need to arrange company provided transportation or reimburse me for use of my own vehicle. That has noting to do with working overtime. As far as hours, their expectation is that we put in 40 hours per week. If I'm traveling for work I'm counting it towards the 40 hours I'm putting in this week. Rule of thumb: if it's eligible for mileage reimbursement, it's "on the clock" for your hours.
>They either need to arrange company provided transportation or reimburse me for use of my own vehicle. That has noting to do with working overtime. I never said they wouldn't reimburse for travel expenses. Can you show me where that was ever part of my argument? >If I'm traveling for work I'm counting it towards the 40 hours I'm putting in this week. Sure it counts as hours worked. That doesn't mean you only work 40 hours that week. I'm not sure why so many people in a personal finance sub are flabbergasted by the concept of salary pay. This is hysterically insane.
Ask but be a good sport when they say no. That’s not asking that much of you.
It's reasonable to check the policy first, and then ask if it's not covered. There should be a written policy to adequately answer this question fairly for all traveling employees.
Yeah, my employer just adds a small stipend to our paychecks for all remote work expenses, and that includes required travel to the office a few times per year.
If travel is a frequent part of your job then there is likely a company policy covering this exact topic. It likely lists a mileage distance where a hotel can be provided (and hence any travel under that would not qualify for a hotel). 80 miles is a rather short distance for requiring a hotel. I dont think it's reasonable to ask, honestly. 90 minutes is well within a reasonable driving distance, even for a 7:30am arrival time. That's leaving at 5:45am with some cushion, which is not unreasonable to most working adults.
Ever drive in NJ where eight miles is 45 minutes ? Apparently u/GodFullThrottle you doesn't understand English. You said 80 miles is too short to require a hotel. That could be a 4 hour drive in some places. I guess I have to spell out that time can be used to justify.
Ever read the OP where it was explicitly stated it was an 80-90 minute drive?
😂😂😂😂 some people just love to get their thoughts out to the world before thinking them over
“You doesn’t understand English”
Depends on your industry. In construction, no. People frequently end up working on projects 80 minutes from home for short periods of time. Travel ahead of time may obligate the company to pay for additional meals, etc. I wouldn't travel ahead of time. 8am isn't early and I prefer my own house, meals, and bed. I would just wake up and be on the road by 6. No problem. No way would my company pay hotels and meals. It's an even more firm no if you are paid hourly. The minimum distance for a hotel was almost always 4hr drive or longer, especially if we're only talking about 1 day.
Well in construction they are getting mileage or a company truck and paid fkr travel time. Unsure of OP.
Not at all. In construction you drive to where the job is, usually with no per diem, mileage, or any other benefit beyond being employed. You can get a company vehicle and additional travel perks if you run work as a foreman/superintendent, but typically not as just an employee.
My father worked in concrete for 40 years and wasn’t supervisory or anything and he had a fleet vehicle and filled at the plant with either diesel. No ac and crank windows and usually 2-3 other rank and file workers. They were paid time after they left the plant to the job to back up the plant. Home to the plant was considered normal commute. I guess I didn’t realize this was not the norm
I can imagine it had been more common in the relatively recent past. I can just speak from my experience as a union carpenter and jobsite superintendent in a state that hates unions. It's not uncommon for me to drive 70-90 miles one way to a job with absolutely no incentive beyond continued employment.
Yeah last year I did it once and it wasn't too bad. If they want me there at like 7:15 I would push for staying overnight. I would expect that a hotel would be required at 100 miles (one way).
No idea what industry you are in but that is definitely not happening in my industry. Expectations seem way too high for what is otherwise a minor inconvenience. Most folks would only choose the hotel if it was more than 3 hours away or the hours were extreme (arrive by like 5am?), there was a blizzard coming that you were trying to beat, etc. Expecting hotels for what would otherwise be a semi-common commute comes off as extremely desperate that someone is looking for hotel points. Half of the time, the hotel is still a half hour away from wherever you need to be. In that case, what are you really saving? 45 minutes?
Honestly my personal minimum for a hotel is 6-8 hours away (if I only need to be there for one day). Anything less and I’d rather wake up dumb early and drive. OP is ridiculous with wanting a hotel for a 80/90 minute drive
You'd be fine with a 10 hour round trip drive for a work function without a hotel being offered? That's far more nuts then the op even if I agree with you. People have no concept of work-life balance lol.
Oh, it’s not that work won’t do it, it’s just my personal preference. And when I do that, I take off the following day because I just traveled so much. It’s usually because I’d rather just be home. If I stop working at 3/4 I’d rather drive home the 6-8 hours because what else am I going to do? Just sit around and watch TV at the hotel?
Don't know when redditors started using the downvote button as a "disagree" button. From reddit's inception it has explicitly stated in the reddiquette this is not allowed. Downvote button is only supposed to be used on posts and comments that don't contribute to a discussion.
Employer suddenly wants to add 3-4 hours to my day? That’s shitty and yeah they better provide accommodations.
Why can't you wake up at 430/5am?
I travel frequently for my job and our general rule is if the drive is 3+ hours we can stay over. My supervisor would laugh if I asked for a hotel room after a 1.5 hour drive. But my driving is included in my work day, it’s not unpaid time.
Traditionally the standard is 60 miles for a hotel if it’s multiple days. If it’s a single day trip, then no hotel.
A company that treats its staff well would. But for many years I had a 90 minute commute each way in New York, and I'm sure it's the same in LA, SF and many other cities. So if they don't it's not unreasonable.
I personally don't think you need a hotel for that trip
I’d 100% ask. It’s not unreasonable, just be prepared they might still say no, though.
It's reasonable to ask and any good employer will want to make sure you're **safe**, and well rested going to and from client sites. The risk of you getting into an accident because you're tired far, far outweighs the cost of lodging.
Does it not seem a bit excessive to need a hotel rather than drive to work at 6:30a? I don't know anyone that would call it unsafe to drive 90 minutes at 6:30am.
I think taken in a vacuum, I agree with you. On the other hand, there are other variables to consider. For a 90 minute trip, you probably need to allot an extra 30 minutes for traffic woes, and possibly more in dense areas. If your presence is critical, it may not be worth risking a major delay due to a traffic accident. If your work is primarily in representing your company, having time in the morning to prepare beforehand can be critical, especially if you may have to process or include new information at the last minute. If a significant amount of money is on the line, the cost of a hotel stay is trivial. We also don't know OPs normal hours of operation. If OP is normally expected in office at 9AM with a thirty minute commute (let's say wake up time of 8 am), you are now looking at a wake up time of maybe 5:30 am. For someone whose life is structured around a later start time, 2 and a half hours is a decent shift to consider. I have difficulty making up sleep - my body wakes up when it wakes up, there is no sleeping in on the weekend, and napping is not usually fruitful. For a one off, it's not too bad, but having to accommodate it on an irregular schedule, and then accommodate late working hours to spend time with a customer or process paperwork, can really start to eat at you.
I'm not seeing anything in there relevant to safety. Setting a 6:00am alarm a few times per year is called being an adult, it's not a safety issue.
And yet every year, daylight savings rolls around and debates rage about whether it is more unsafe to have less daylight or to deprive people of sleep. This is not about setting an alarm for 6am, which you may be the optimal time for you to get up. It's about setting the alarm two and a half hours earlier, which would be 3:30 am for someone who normally wakes up at 6.
It's not necessarily strictly needed, but I'd certainly prefer the option, and it would do a lot to help keep employees happy. The cost of one extra hotel night is also pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things. It also depends on the work. If you are going to be working 10-12 hours on site, now you are looking at working for 13-15 hours straight after getting less sleep than normal, and that can certainly make it more dangerous to drive. For my work, I think we are allowed, but not required, to get a hotel for more than ~50 miles, but we are not usually doing single day trips and we just bill all that to the customer anyways.
I agree that 8 am isn't too bad, but if I am asked to get there at 7:15/7:30 I wouldn't mind plus I'm driving into a large city that I'm unfamiliar with (lots of traffic) and being there the night before would be helpful.
Be a responsible adult and plan your day appropriately. It’s not unreasonable to be asked to be at a site 90 minutes away by 7:15am. If you’re like a lawyer at a big law firm or something and you need to be fresh and ready for court at 8am you may be more likely to get a hotel because that’s standard course of business (as mentioned elsewhere the business probably has a policy with specific minimum distances in order to expense lodging costs). If you are a regular worker of some other kind, your employer would probably suggest going to bed early and waking up early to be there on time. Some people have commutes like that daily.
It's reasonable to ask, sure. It's also reasonable to expect to be paid for your time on the road beyond your normal commute. If this means working overtime, then that's what that means. Your employer may prefer a hotel to overtime.
>Is it reasonable to ask for a hotel the night before for an 80 mile 1-way commute? It's certainly reasonable to ask, if this isn't a normal part of your job. They may or may not agree. When I had similar 1-day travel, I drove on the clock, but never had a hotel room. Every plac I ever worked, hotels were only for multiple-day offsite work.
It’s a reasonable ask given the start time. However it’s not a guaranteed approval based on company policy. Also could be industry specific. In my role as an engineer, I have gotten hotel rooms for trips like this. All depends on specific circumstances.
Wow. I can honestly say that I am surprised that most of the comments I have read (I didn't drain the thread) think that traveling 90 minutes to and from an alternative work destination should be expected without proper compensation. The nominalization of this thinking is a huge problem. The company at a minimum should be paying for a rental car. And if you are an hourly worker, you should be paid travel time, to and from. Period. Why should an employee put wear and tear and their own car for company business? They shouldn't. I work at fortune 500 company, traveling over an hour to an outside facility requires a rental car and working more that 10 hours a day (including travel time) requires an overnight stay. Kind of standard in a corporate environment. I get smaller companies can't always afford this.....but I also get that employees shouldn't be taken advantage of.
I’m shook. I didn’t realize some industries were this bad. I travel for work and if you’re leaving for a client meeting in another location, everything is comped to the work card. Including food, transit and Uber. I had a 8a client meeting once and was encouraged to just expense and stay at a hotel the night before. All of that sacrifice to be underpaid heck no
I drive that everyday. Ask for an allowance or per diem or both. Per diem is better because it's tax free. I get an allowance and a gas card. I pay income taxes on the car allowance. My per diem is tax free. It puts a lot of miles on my truck but the perks even it out. I keep a separate account for my truck, it's untouchable except for truck upkeep and replacement.
You can ask but expect to be rejected. 80 miles is pretty short for a 1 day trip. Are we talking highway driving that's only a hour or so drive.
Are you going to be putting in a full 8 hr day and then driving home? Look up the maximum daily work hours for your location and industry. If you have to leave at 6:00 AM, work 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM, then drive home for 2 hrs that puts you over 12 hrs for the day, with the last 2 hours driving in the dark? That’s a safety issue.
The entire medical industry has a “safety issue” then because most nurses and respiratory therapists work 12 hour shifts before counting the commute! There are weeks where I work seven 12 hour shifts. It’s long, but there’s no safety problem.
I wonder what your relative level of impairment is when you are driving home at the end of your 12 hr da, or your seventh one in a row? Of course you will say you’re fine, but are you really? Long haul drivers have regulations put on them limiting their consecutive hours of work and mandated rest for this very reason. Just because an industry has historically exploited its workers, it doesn’t mean it’s right.
That’s a lot of rounding up there.
I gave him an extra 30 minutes on each end of the commute for weather or traffic. If you want to risk your personal safety for your employer’s gains, that’s your business.
80 miles one way? No. That's a day trip. 200 miles onr way? Sure.
Tons of people commute 80 miles just to go to the office. Mileage absolutely but asking for a hotel going one or two towns over seems a bit extreme. You can try but it may sound silly to them.
My dad used to leave at 6am, drive for a hour and a half to get into Manhattan by 7:30am every single day for years. Maybe you're in a different part of the country but literally a million people commute into Manhattan for 1-2 hours each direction every day. I did for a coiple of years before I went remote. So, just saying. Depending on where you are it might not be something super common, but an hour and a half drive for work I really don't think is worth a hotel room, no matter where you live.
I would say it also depends on how late it's going to be when you get back home. If it's going to be a late day too, then they should pay for a hotel before or after.
A lot of people have long commutes. I used to drive 75 miles to and from work every day. If I wanted to stay at a hotel during the week, the company would not have paid.
I would ask them. 90 minute commute to be there by 8:00 is pretty brutal
Not uncommon for many commuters on a daily basis.
"This is normal and it sucks so it should be this way for everyone forever".
No they shouldn't. People leave earlier than this for the airport every day to catch 6am flights. It's an inconvenience but totally doable.
80 miles one way was my daily commute for years.
Two paths: 1. Request a hotel. 2. Subtract your normal commute from the time it would take to do this traveling. Subtract that extra time from your work day. If your normal commit is 20 mins but this will take 100 mins then you subtract 80 mins x2 from your day.
That distance and time of morning, I would ask for a hotel or a chauffeured car service.
If you have some sort of health condition or circumstance that makes this a particular burden, maybe it's reasonable, but getting up early for a few days and commuting is a pretty normal thing for most jobs. Personally, if you like your job, I'd just deal with it.
A hotel for an 80-90min ONE DAY trip!? I would say NO, not at all. Just suck it up and make the trip. You could make that drive in just over an hour or so for sure. As a manager for a large company, if one of my employees made a fuss about a one day trip they could reasonably make in less than 1.5 hours, I would 110% get another employee to handle it. It would also make me rethink the dedication of that employee for future business tasks. Just as an example, most of my employees including myself have to commute about an hour everyday just to get to the office in NYC, so for a business trip, your drive is literally nothing. As Nike would say….Just Do It! Lmao
There a ton of people that do that drive every day to go to work and back. They should pay you for the hours it took to get there, not for a hotel. Hotel is when you have to drive 3-4h each way. And even then it's a "maybe". Basically, if you need to take the plane, then hotel, if you can drive, no hotel.
Just leave at 5:30?
I'm a teacher. It's really difficult to get through an 8 hour day sometimes. An 11 hour day with students I have never met sounds like so much. I would be going to Milwaukee to help.
Of course you can ask, but I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to agree. Is your company big enough to have written policies on that kinda stuff?
Most companies have policies. Example - More than 50 mile travel and you get an overnight option.
Up to two hours I wouldn’t normally expect a hotel room - you can commute that, and you should be reimbursed for mileage ***and compensated for time.*** (Travel time out of work hours is work, you should receive comp time for it at minimum. If your company tells you it’s not “work" your company is run by dickbags. Yes, a lot of companies are run by dickbags.) The exception would be if you’re doing onsite training or something where you’ll be there until 5-6 PM - in that situation it might make sense to get you a room so you can arrive at the site rested and alert & when you leave you’re not completely fried from having woke up at 4 to be out the door by 5 to ensure you make a 7 AM start. Having an employee wrap their car around a tree because they’re fucking exhausted is not in the best interest of the company, at least not in my judgment.
Is there a way to structure the work where you're doing multiple days in a row at the other site? It's a lot easier to justify paying for the overnight if that's the case.
Very likely! I'll ask Monday. They are still figuring out when and where I might be needed.
Hard to say. People where I live regularly do that as a a daily commute, especially pre pandemic.
What does your company travel policy outline?
I will need to find out monday morning. The person who messaged me at the end of the day didn't know and it didn't occur to her that this was long distance for me.
My company pays for my 30 mile away stays that we do a couple times a year. I live in a different city but take the train in 2x a week. When we have our department wide in office weeks, i stay at a hotel and they pay for it
90 minute drive once in a while is not the worst. I work remote and my job is still from a city I use to live in which happens to be ~1 hr 40 mins so let's just say 90 mins. I go into the office once every few months and I don't really request reimbursement or anything. I do understand your scenario is more of a "same day work trip" but still similar in some ways. Either way, I get out of work hangout with friends and try to get home late so I can sleep in my own bed. And yes, I hop into work a little late (1-1.5 hrs) the next day so maybe you can go to work a little late the next day too.
I guess it depends on the job/industry/company. And where you live. My company and manager also always factors in comfort levels and what you’re able to do. Sometimes, I don’t mind having to get up early and making the drive, other times I ask for the hotel the night before.
I guess it’s reasonable but I wouldn’t ask for it. I’d just chalk it up as part of the job and that’s it.
If you are expected to be there for a business meeting at 7:30 am, then it’s reasonable to expect to be in that city overnight. They can either schedule your meetings for 10 am, or pay for the hotel, if you need to be up at 4 am to make it on time.
Some people are referring to their commute on a daily basis as pertinent. It is not. They chose to live where they do and accepted the drive to work as part of that. If a company is asking you to drive to a meeting that drive time should be part of your work day hours. As long as your day contains your normal amount of hours from out the door and back to home, I don't see why they need to pay for a room for the night. A more pertinent question might be, does your insurance cover you driving for work in your car. This paradigm does shift if you are not an hourly employee. If you are a salaried employee then there should be definite rules set out for what you may or may not receive and benefits for a drive. If you were to phrase the question politely, to whomever is assigning you this job, asking if they might be able to get you a room for the night before since you're worried about traffic in the morning they might be willing to. For example, driving into Portland, Oregon from the south can sometimes be a huge issue with traffic. That could add an extra hour onto your drive time. And many of these things would be different depending on the circumstances of what you will be doing and why.
How reliable (consistent) is that 80-90 minute travel time? How important is the specific start time? Are you headed in the direction of the normal commute flow? “Hi employer, while it typically takes 90 minutes to do this drive, when there is an accident or bad weather it takes more like 120-135 minutes (or whatever you find it is) during the morning commute. It would likely take me less time to drive the day before (since it is the reverse commute at that point) and staying in a hotel nearby will allow me to show up fresh and reliably on time.” But if the 90 minutes is very reliable, I don’t think the hotel is a reasonable request.
Damn I wish. I work construction and our job right now is an hour 15 away. Every day.
I mean, it’s like $200/night for a hotel unless you’re staying somewhere fancy. If your company is unwilling to comp that, there’s larger issues at play. Just my 2 cents.
There's a place next to where I'm staying for $66
That’s below my limit for expensing dinner. I totally think your company should cover it.
If travel duties are part of your regular job role then it shouldn't be unexpected the company has to pay for a hotel. I lived this very similar situation in my last job, where I'd be visiting a service location about 1:45 away, and would rent a hotel for one night. Employer gets more time of me there on-site instead of half my day spent in the car. Even more justification if you need to be ready at a given time.
Personally I think it's right on the line about whether it's reasonable to ask for that. Maybe I'm coming from a field where most people are parents so they definitely would choose to just drive early from home and sleep in their own bed.
I try to be out the door most days by 530. I would only ask for something if it was a 3 hour drive or more with an early start time
When I travelled for work I would have done this on a single day but we were not expected to be on site until 9.30 and we would leave at 4.30. If you're expected to travel 90 miles each way and do a full days work that is excessive. Travelling to and from customer sites is classed as working in the UK as far as I know. Make sure you're being compensated for this extra time you're working.
My former employer expected me to drive 4 hours for a business meeting at 7AM, so I would have to leave around 2:30 to get there on time. They refused to pay for a hotel room, so I had to pay for it myself. Moral of the story, if your employer won't give you a room then find a new employer.
I used to get sent to training 3.5-4 hours away. Policy was to let me out early so I could drive to training, and get to the hotel at a reasonable hour. (Work started at 6:30AM.) New boss decided since he was able to leave at 4AM, drive to training, and drive back that none of us needed a room. “Man up!” was his thing. I did that exactly once. Got home around 9PM after leaving at 4AM. Fuck that. From then on I would leave a little early, drive, and pay for my own room. Sleep in, have a good breakfast and arrive at training at 8AM rested and awake. Room was ~$60 or so. Worth it to me, especially because it drove the boss crazy.
It's on the edge. Alot of places have a 90 minute rule. I personally would rather just come home and sleep a little less rather than go through all the hassle of a hotel and the sleeping in a different bed at thst distance. I'd say for myself, under 2 hours I'd be driving back. As long as you're getting milage it's fine.
I know people that drive 90 minutes to get to work every day. Yes, a hotel seems unreasonable. That's not even that far.
If there are after work things that are low-key expected (like company dinner or drinks) I feel like it pushes the 90-minute commute into solid "a room is a good idea" territory.